Top
Note: Supplemental materials are not guaranteed with Rental or Used book purchases.
Purchase Benefits
Free Shipping On Orders Over $35!
Get Rewarded for Ordering Your Textbooks! Enroll Now
Customer Reviews Read Reviews
Write a Review
What is included with this book?
Joshua Muravchik lauds Bush’s new national security strategy and chides critics for offering no real alternative. Three elements of the strategy are presented and analyzed: fighting terrorists and tyrants, building good relations among the great powers, and encouraging free and open societies.
Today the United States is seen as facing many of the same strategic dilemmas that faced great powers in the past. Jack Snyder argues that the Bush national security doctrine does not reflect a sober appreciation of the extent to which America’s position embodies both omnipotence and vulnerability.
According to John Gaddis, the ultimate success of Bush’s national security strategy rests upon the willingness of the rest of the world to welcome the United States. He analyzes both what this document says and what it leaves out. He concludes that it is too early to judge whether it will work.
Joseph Nye cautions that the new conventional wisdom that the United States is all-powerful is dangerous because it leads to a foreign policy that combines unilateralism, arrogance, and parochialism. In a global information age, the United States cannot achieve its objectives by acting alone but must be prepared to pursue a multilateral foreign policy.
The United States has become the powerless superpower, according to Immanuel Wallerstein. The same economic, political, and military factors that gave rise to American hegemony are now leading to its inevitable decline. The key question today is, Can the United States devise a way to descend gracefully or will it crash-land in a rapid and dangerous fall?
Samuel Huntington argues that while the world is not unipolar, the United States is acting as if it is. In doing so, the United States is becoming increasingly isolated from other states, and it is taking on the characteristics of a rogue superpower.
The national security challenges facing the United States in the coming years extend beyond terrorism. In this article five other pressing problems that demand an American foreign policy response are discussed: the illegal trade in drugs, arms, intellectual property, people, and money. They are all rooted in globalization.
Much has been made of the gap between the United States and Europe over the conduct of world affairs. This article compares American and European public opinion. It finds similarities in how both groups think about using military force as well as some potentially dangerous differences in outlook.
The author asserts that in order to develop an effective China policy, the Bush administration must recognize that a disconnect exists between China’s economic and diplomatic foreign policies. The former has been constructive. The latter has all but ignored the negative global implications of these actions for Asia and the global war against terrorism.
The authors survey several key issues that must be addressed in constructing a North Korean policy including: Does it belong in the axis of evil? Does it pose a direct nuclear threat to the United States? Is it undeterrable? And is its collapse imminent?
A turbulent future is seen for Iran. The seeds of this conflict are found in the relentless confrontations between reformist and conservative domestic political forces. The author argues that this situation calls for a nuanced U.S. foreign policy that is predicated on a “wait and see” approach to events in Iran.
Afghanistan illustrates the transnational and regional nature of contemporary conflict and peacemaking. The presence of U.S. forces temporarily curbed external involvement and competition in Afghanistan, but regional states have now resumed their interference in its domestic affairs. This article surveys current reconstruction problems and speculates on what can be done.
Daniel Pipes, a strong defender of Israel, organizes his review of peace plans into three categories and finds that each has major deficiencies. This includes Bush’s “road map.” Pipes asserts that the root of the problem lies with the Palestinians, whom he sees as harboring murderous intentions vis-a-vis Israel.
A new immigration agreement with Mexico was high on Bush’s agenda when he took office. After 9-11, immigration came to be viewed in terms of homeland security. This article examines the domestic and international politics of Mexican immigration to the United States and recommends a return to a policy of incrementalism.
American nationalism is rooted in a faith in the superiority of American ideas rather than a sense of ethnic superiority. This rejection of ethnic nationalism contributes to the inability of Americans to understand the continuing power of nationalism in world affairs and perceptions of American illegitimacy in conducting foreign policy.
James Chace contends that the Bush administration’s foreign policy signals the robust rebirth of American unilaterialism. As such it represents a departure from the internationalism that was put in place by President Franklin Roosevelt and that operated during the cold war.
The authors argue that the Democratic Party’s strategy of conceding the field of foreign policy to President Bush is bound to fail. They assert that the challenge facing Democrats is to find and articulate a vision of nationalist liberalism. Military spending and Iraq are key issues that must be addressed.
This article asserts that the arms industry has more influence over American foreign policy making today than at any time in the last 40 years. It examines the role played by corporate-supported conservative think tanks in developing the preemptive military strategy espoused by the Bush administration.
Following the events of September 11, 2001, many spoke of a return to the imperial presidency. Donald Wolfensberger examines the history of this concept and its roots in the excesses of Watergate and Vietnam. He warns against investing the idea of an imperial presidency with too great an aura of legitimacy.
The editors of Foreign Policy present evaluations of George W. Bush’s performance as president from around the world. Contributors were asked to rate Bush on such items as advancing American interests, building alliances, conducting personal diplomacy, making tough choices, and having a coherent strategic vision.
Richard Betts observes that even the best intelligence systems will have big failures and that the U.S. intelligence system has generally done a good job. In this article he reviews the merits of reform proposals. Betts maintains that the only thing worse than business as usual in the intelligence area would be naive assumptions about the potential benefits of reform.
Newt Gingrich, a former Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives, calls for a top-to-bottom reform of the State Department. He sees it as overly passive and accommodating of foreign perspectives and incapable of carrying out the foreign policy of the Bush administration.
John Brady Kiesling is a Foreign Service Officer who resigned in protest over American foreign policy toward Iraq in spring of 2003. In this, his letter of resignation, Kiesling argues that current American foreign policy is incompatible with American values and American interests.
The American military is geared to fight wars, not to serve as occupation forces. It is not well suited to the task of establishing and maintaining security in precarious political environments. This article examines the reasons why this situation has developed, the costs associated with continuing in this pattern, and what might be done.
This article highlights the internal conflicts that drive the policymaking process in the Bush administration on the Arab-Israeli issue. At its core is a dispute between Secretary of State Colin Powell and forces allied with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney. Powell has been the loser in this battle.
This article recounts one full day of decision making inside the Bush administration following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. It begins with Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) George Tenet making a case for CIA covert action in Afghanistan and goes on to chronicle the positions advocated by Powell, Rumsfeld, and other key decision makers.
During the cold war, policy makers were divided into hawks and doves. Michael Krepon argues that the policy-making struggle today is between conciliators and dominators. Dominators are currently in the ascendance. He analyzes these competing perspectives and calls for a synthesis of the two.
Michael Klare asserts that President Bush’s energy plan introduced in May 2001 would increase the amount of foreign oil coming into the United States by 50 percent. He examines the implications of this for U.S. national security policy through a survey of regional politics in the Middle East, the Caspian Sea, Latin America, and Africa.
The authors propose that, in the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks, it is not a matter of should the United States be engaged in the world but how. They examine the challenges of fighting poverty, gaining a consensus on foreign aid, and strengthening the trade system.
Bernard Gordon criticizes the Bush administration’s interest in promoting regional free trade agreements, especially in Asia. The author sees them as fundamentally incompatible with American national interests and as posing serious problems for multilateral efforts such as the World Trade Organization. He calls for increased attention to the Doha negotiations.
John Newhouse presents an overview of the types of threats that American military planners must take into account in acquiring weapons and formulating strategies. Included in this list are nuclear weapons, dirty bombs, cruise missiles, rogue states, plus an array of lower-profile threats. Newhouse calls for abandoning a me-first strategic policy and adopting a policy of multilateralism.
General Wesley Clark, who was Supreme Allied Commander in Europe from 1997 to 2000 and commanded NATO forces in Kosovo, argues that allies are an essential ingredient to military victory in the war against terrorism and should not be viewed as an obstacle or unnecessary.
Robert Lieber examines the meaning of containment in the post–9-11 world. He finds the record of containment directed against Iraq to be long and dreary and argues for a policy of offensive military action against terrorists and dictators.
America’s primary interests in the region are identified in this article. A stable flow of oil, Iraq’s security dilemma, Iran’s nuclear weapons program, and internal unrest in other states are likely to be the source of security threats. Three broad approaches for dealing with these threats are identified.
In May 2002 Russia and the United States signed a nuclear arms control agreement. Jack Mendelsohn reviews the treaty and finds it to be a vaguely worded and potentially contentious agreement. He fears that increased nuclear flexibility has been obtained at the cost of decreased security.
The author maintains that the dynamics of proliferation today are too complex for any one country to deal with on its own. The need is for a multilateral diplomatic response that he categorizes as “NPT plus.” This essay focuses on the nuclear problems presented by pre-war Iraq and North Korea.
The New copy of this book will include any supplemental materials advertised. Please check the title of the book to determine if it should include any access cards, study guides, lab manuals, CDs, etc.
The Used, Rental and eBook copies of this book are not guaranteed to include any supplemental materials. Typically, only the book itself is included. This is true even if the title states it includes any access cards, study guides, lab manuals, CDs, etc.
Need Help? Copyright © 1999-2024